I have to admit I was initially taken in by some, but as the scare stories became more & more preposterous ( e.g. “Global Extinction within one Human Lifetime” “Boiling Acid Oceans” & mysterious “tipping points”), I decided to apply due diligence to a few; the results were a real eye opener, so I delved deeper, what I found was disturbing. e.g;

“It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.”

Paul Watson, a founder of Greenpeace’

“If we want a good environmental policy in the future we’ll need to have a disaster.”

Quote by Sir John Houghton, lead editor of first three IPCC reports

I am a life-long ‘Green’ a practically-oriented environmentalist and conservationist & was an early member of both Greenpeace (GP) & Friends of the Earth (FOE); & involved with ‘The Center for Alternative Technology’. I think a shift to an efficient and sustainable way of life, using appropriate technology is a good thing; science & engineering are the keys.

As a retired Research & Development engineer, used to problem solving, research & wading through loads of data, I’m dismayed at the way science has been usurped by politics & that the public now rather believe the ranting of ignorant politicians, journalists churnalists & NGOs instead of scientific facts.

Engineers are numerate beings, so understand that making any decisions for the future, based on imperfectly understood events or data is folly.

I can’t understand how you could possibly calculate a single number, which represents the entire planet for a year & use that to build an energy policy… (Strangely ‘climate scientists’ claim to calculate Earth’s temperature within 0.01 degrees – even though they had no temperature data for about half of the land surface, & very little in Africa, Arctic or Antarctica !!) … it’s nonsense.

The global average temperature is about as significant as the global average telephone number. You may as well use ‘42’.

(But for research purposes… lets assume it’s possible. )

There should be either a complete understanding of the system, or conclusions should be drawn from sufficient relevant statistical data; unfortunately in ‘climate science’ neither exists.

The Climate Crisis Industry has for years swamped us with unsubstantiated dire predictions of gloom & doom, sounding more like Harold Camping (Google him) with every assertion, now the unrealistic fears of global warming seems to cause a rectal-cranial inversion in most of its followers.

But, despite what we read in newspapers, real science tells us that….As CO2 continues to rise, global temperatures haven’t (for the last 18 years) & are more out of sync with computer model predictions with every passing year. Seas are rising at barely 7 inches a century. ‘Unprecedented’ droughts and other extreme weather events are now LESS frequent, severe & long-lasting than during the twentieth century. “Vanishing” Arctic, Greenland & Antarctic ice is re-freezing rapidly & growing at a record pace.

However, I can now understand why they would want that; having discovered many reputations & the colossal amounts of money at stake, plus there has been a considerable amount of data falsification to produce the required political result.

That’s NOT the way science should work… but it is the way politics works.

After years of researching the subject & supplying the (often difficult to find) info ad hoc, I was asked to gather the most important facts into one place & make it freely available; without the reader drowning in volumes of unnecessary verbiage, verbosity, wordiness, prolixity, long-windedness, loquacity, rigmarole, circumlocution, superfluity, periphrasis….in other words… I’ve tried to cut through all the crap. (Not been an easy job!! )

A lot of misinformation & badly understood scientific ideas are thrown around by both sides of the debate.

The info & links on this site are all well researched scientific facts;